Is The New York Times launching deranged attacks on Britain and the Queen to make money from China? – Daily Mail


Back in 1997, an American journalist named Joseph Kahn could be found in Hong Kong covering Britain’s handover of its former colony to the People’s Republic of China.

Kahn’s account of the post-imperial pomp and circumstance, published in the Wall Street Journal, was a curiously partisan piece of journalism.

On one hand, Kahn managed to be weirdly sympathetic to the communist dictatorship taking over this hitherto-vibrant democracy, at times parroting lines that might have been pinched from its propaganda manual.

‘An ascendant China regained sovereignty over this skyscraper-stacked business colossus with flag-festooned ceremonies amid fireworks, cannon salutes and torrential downpours,’ began his dispatch, before noting that ‘China’s rising status in the world was made clear at the ceremonies’.

On the other hand, Kahn’s article seemed curiously hostile to the departing Brits, or at least to the manner in which America’s oldest ally chose to say goodbye.

‘A heavy downpour drenched guests, just as a military band struck up the first chords of God Save The Queen, and Prince Charles’s speech was drowned out,’ it read. ‘A light rain kept up until Her Majesty’s Yacht Britannia slipped out of Hong Kong’s harbour . . . shortly after midnight.’

New York Times Executive Editor Joseph Kahn photographed by Chris Buck, in which the newspaperman posed with a mug bearing a Chinese symbol 

The New York Times kicked off its coverage — little more than two hours after the monarch’s death had been announced — with a lengthy comment piece. We should not ‘romanticise her era,’ the piece claimed

This reporting was not entirely accurate: the ‘downpour’ evident in surviving footage had actually started long before the National Anthem was played, while the now-King’s speech appears to have been perfectly audible to the crowds who gathered to watch him. 

But those minor issues don’t seem to have prevented the article’s ambitious — if rather Anglophobic — young author from subsequently climbing the greasy pole of his profession.

Today, Joseph Kahn is executive editor of the New York Times, America’s most famous newspaper. And in the 25 years that have passed since the handover of Hong Kong, he remains mustard keen on pouring scorn in the general direction of Britain, and its Royal Family.

How else can we explain the insensitive and at times grotesque manner in which the ‘Old Grey Lady’ — a nickname Kahn’s Left-leaning paper owes to its dreary layout and headlines — has chosen to mark the death of the Queen?



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *